Regulation Tracker / United States (state)
Ethics of Using Artificial Intelligence in Practice (NHBA Ethics Corner)
New Hampshire Bar Association Ethics Committee · New Hampshire
last revised 2024-05-15last verified 2026-09-041 versioncountry page →
GuidanceIn forceCompetenceConfidentialityVerification duty
map categories:Bar guidance on generative AIClient data in AI toolsDuty to verify AI outputTechnological competence
A practical ethics article from the New Hampshire Bar Association Ethics Committee applying NH RPC 1.1, 1.6, 3.3, 3.4 and 4.1 to generative AI. It stresses technology competence, review of vendor privacy policies before entering client data, and verification of AI output, citing Mata v. Avianca. It is guidance rather than a formal opinion.
- Applies to
- lawyers
- Effective
- See version history
- Current version
- Ethics Corner article · 15 May 2024
- Last verified
- 04 Sept 2026
What the document requires
- NH RPC 1.1 requires understanding how an AI system is designed and operates before relying on output
- NH RPC 1.6 requires reviewing vendor terms and privacy policies before inputting client information
- Lawyers must verify the accuracy of AI results and be able to explain them to a court
- Unverified AI content risks Rule 11 sanctions and violations of RPC 3.3, 3.4 and 4.1
- Generative AI should generally not be used to draft pleadings because that usually discloses confidential client information to the tool
Version history
| Version | Date | What changed | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ethics Corner articlecurrent | 2024-05-15 | Initial publication; companion article on drafting documents with AI | official |
Sources
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "Ethics of Using Artificial Intelligence in Practice (NHBA Ethics Corner)" (New Hampshire Bar Association Ethics Committee, Ethics Corner article, 2024-05-15), safelegalai.com/regulation/us-state/us-nh-bar-ethics-corner-ai-in-practice (accessed 2026-09-04). Data: CC BY 4.0.
More official documents in United States (state)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch, Committee on Artificial Intelligence in the Connecticut Legal System: Final Report · Connecticut Judicial Branch
- Connecticut Practice Book Section 4-9: Generative Artificial Intelligence Compliance · Connecticut Judicial Branch
- In re Amendments to Article V, Rule 1.1 of the Supreme Court Rules (Professional Conduct) and Adoption of Interim Generative AI Guidelines · RI Supreme Court
- Ohio Ethics Guide: Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers and Judicial Officers · Ohio Board of Professional Conduct
- 22 NYCRR Part 161 — Use of Artificial Intelligence Technology · NY Unified Court System
- In re Amendments to Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515 (generative AI), SC2026-0673 · Florida Supreme Court